The second iteration of 2v8 is now LIVE - find out more information here: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/480-2v8-developer-update

Repeatedly running into this 2 v 1 stand off situation

Its happening almost every other game, took 25min to find the last 2 survivors because they refused to do gens and hid the whole time. After 25min looked like they got bored and started doing a gen so I found them. And people have the cheek to complain about 4min slugging? Really? Sorry but no sympathy from me, the last 2 survivors of that match was slugged while I watched them crawl around. That's the treatment people can expect from me, I'm sure others disagree with it but I'm sure many others do. And yes they were reported because as per Devs explanation, actively avoiding the objective (gens) when the hatch is not available is holding game hostage and is reportable.

«1

Comments

  • jajay119
    jajay119 Member Posts: 1,061
    edited August 18

    But, the 25 minute wait is intrinsically linked to the fact that that game has become unmanageable at 2v1. OP even said they had no issue finding them when they eventually started doing gens. Add to that, so many killers slug for the 4K (which whether we want to admit it or not is a massive issue). I went against at least 4 killers out of about 7 games the other day who spent some time hunting for me and the other survivor only to slug when they found us and that was with me getting the other player off the ground twice and trying to do a gen whilst the Bill went and hid in a corner when I was downed (in my final match of the day). Honestly, I don’t blame him. Everything is linked, it’s not one sided. So if killers are bored of the 25 minute hunt they need to accept the game needs to change and not entirely in their favour as many seem to want.

    I think the reason 2v8 was so popular was because this didn’t happen.

  • ArkInk
    ArkInk Member Posts: 734

    Right, but the person I was replying to said this is just about OP and Killers wanting free 4ks, which isn't true in this context, we just want the game to end and hiding prolongs that.

    As I said in my original comment, if hatch spawned at 2 survs after a certain time so one of the them could get out, and then standard Egc occurs after that surv escapes, I'm just fine with that as a potential change, regardless of if it means survivors get out more often, because it means the game would end faster by virtue of people not hiding. Make changes to slugging as well, I hate that about as much.

    I understand these gameplay mechanics are linked, my point is simply that a killer's stance on this issue shouldn't be boiled down to 'I want 4ks' when to me it's more 'I don't want to wait 25 mins just so one of you can maybe get hatch.'

  • jajay119
    jajay119 Member Posts: 1,061
    edited August 18

    Respectfully, I don’t feel that Is the resolve you think it is though. Killers find the hatch pretty quickly in my experience (to the point I don’t even try and find it anymore - I think trying to mind game the killer at the doors is more successful). So the killer finds the hatch and then you either have an ECG active with two survivors in the game and can tackle the doors too easily (which killers would rightly not think is fair), or you end up right back in the current situation if the ECG doesn’t activate if none of the survivors find it. The only other option is that the hatch spawns closed with a key somewhere on the map, but then you end up in another situation where survivors aren’t touching gens and are stealthing round the map looking for keys.

    Unfortunately, there needs to be something built into the core mechanics of the game to fairly help survivors e.g the less survivors there are in the game the quicker they repair gens or when all survivors are downed one survivor has a chance to get back up following some sort of Lengthy QTE/location objective when downed. But again, killers wouldn’t want this which leads people to the conclusion they just want the 4K easier.

  • NerfDHalready
    NerfDHalready Member Posts: 1,749

    yes i won the match to the point survivors can't even touch their objective anymore. after that point i want all survivors dead as the killer, should have been obvious why.

  • Nazzzak
    Nazzzak Member Posts: 5,703

    Page 3 of the Tome has a Escape 2 Trials challenge. I imagine this scenario isn't uncommon this week.

  • Gastongard
    Gastongard Member Posts: 142

    Unless BHVR gives survivors an incentive for doing gens, this will keep happening, so far all the answers to this issue has been giving the killer the free 4k, with aura revealing within X amount of time, crows appearing faster, etc. These are all bad ideas, because will put the balance more on the killer side than what already is (60-70% according to BHVR) and this will end up with more nerfs to killer perks, etc. I think the best should be something similar to what Propnight did, each time a survivor dies the remaining survivors gained some extra % in repairing, to the point that the game is not over even when is 1v1, that survivor is able to even repair by himself if he can do it the last gen. This would also help balancing the game in the scenario of your teammate killing himself on the first hook. On the other hand, killers should gain X% of perma haste per survivor killed. In propnight we saw this working and the killers still had the advantage and most % in wining matches.I think games would be a lot more interactive and less boring in a 2v1 scenario with something like this implemented.

    I think this would make the game more interactive and less boring in those scenarios.

  • redglyph
    redglyph Member Posts: 55

    Survivors who just hide are bad.
    There's no strategy or anything.

    I want Whisper add for killers.
    I think it would be okay to have conditions such as if more than 15 minutes have passed.

  • baharuto48
    baharuto48 Member Posts: 124

    Survivors can pick themselves up when 2 left. Why does OP feel justified punishing players. Sounds abusive. Object of obsession and iron maiden activates when 2 left. Something in game can resolve this. The pieces are there.

  • ArkInk
    ArkInk Member Posts: 734

    I honestly feel as if I've been extremely clear I don't like slugging as a strat and that my frustration lies with not being able to find survivors for long periods of time, prolonging games far past the point they should be. Fine, Hatch spawning at two survs doesn't work, find another solution. I don't know what more you want me to say.

  • NerfDHalready
    NerfDHalready Member Posts: 1,749

    stealth isn't skillful especially if you can't manage doing gens in the meantime. surely not knowing which one of the 100 lockers or rocks killer needs to check is them being bad.

  • Phenomenal_Ox
    Phenomenal_Ox Member Posts: 47
    edited August 19

    I think this is created from the "Win Condition" from the devs, only escapes matters to them anything else you do in the game don't matter, so why the Last 2 survivors Risk getting fond and lose just hide and try to escape "win" in the devs eyes.

  • Xernoton
    Xernoton Member Posts: 5,863

    If 2 survivors hide and don't do gens then the killer gets a free kill anyway. It's not a "hide 10 minutes and get out for free". You don't progress and you don't get out. The problem is that the result is already predetermined. Nobody wants to play a 10 minutes game in which it is already clear exactly what is going to happen.

    The results don't change because of this mechanic. They just happen before you are bored out of your mind. Survivors can't win if they don't do gens. That's the flaw in your argument.

  • Xernoton
    Xernoton Member Posts: 5,863

    Sorry. I can't answer both of you in one post for some reason.

    You are wrong about the 4k. It's a guaranteed 3k if the survivors don't do gens because the other one still has a chance at hatch. Which is exactly the same result that we have now. Only that it wouldn't take a ridiculous amount of time to get a result that was inevitable. We are talking about SURVIVORS THAT DON'T DO GENS. They can't escape anyway, so it's not even a tie-breaker. They will lose simply because they don't progress their objective.

    The only question at that point is, how long will it take? The answer to this question should not be 25 minutes or longer.

  • Coffeecrashing
    Coffeecrashing Member Posts: 3,794

    If there are only two survivors left, and the survivors haven’t repaired 5 generators yet, then the game should start a 3 minute timer, and if there are still generators left after 3 minutes, then start giving killer instinct on the survivors every 30 seconds.

    The compensation is when one of the two survivors gets grabbed or knocked to the ground, the game should wait a second and then immediately go into a finisher mori. This immediately starts the hatch phase.

    And in the unlikely scenario that at least one survivor is already slugged when the game gets down to two survivors, then randomly finisher mori one of the slugged survivors, and set the other survivor’s health state to healthy.

    And there you go. A system that helps stop the 2 survivor stalemate, and stops slugging for the 4k.

  • Moonras2
    Moonras2 Member Posts: 381

    I'm not against this at all. It would be a quick solution for both outcomes and game stallng.

    I would also like to throw in a more complicated way though. Perhaps this could be something that gives survivors more hope on escape. I'm only speculating but maybe it would help cut down on dcs or hook suicides.

    Instead of the finisher mori. If no gen has been touched, and no survivors in chase, for 1 or 2 minutes then survivor auras are revealed for the remainder of the match. No more hiding for a win. Time can be adjusted but I think 1 minute is plenty of time to find and start a gen.

    On the flip side, if only two survivors are left, and a survivor is left on the ground for more than 1-2 minutes, the hatch will spawn. It will be visible to all 3 players. Only one survivor may use the hatch. It will permanently close if someone hops in and the egc will start. This im more comfortable with at 2 minutes or higher because searching for someone is a lot more work than finding a gen.

    If the killer reaches it first, it will close and start the egc.

    Now plays from both sides becomes risky. Slugging for the 4k may end with the slugged or the other getting hatch. Possibly even triggering adrenaline for the slugged.

    Hiding for hatch will also turn in to the killer being able to see both survivors for the remainder of the match. With plenty of time to probably down them both for the 4k before the other triggers.

  • Xernoton
    Xernoton Member Posts: 5,863
    edited August 19

    Then automatically activate the finisher mori on the 3rd survivor when they're down, if they had been revealed by this mechanic. It's that simple. Suddenly they're dead and the other survivor still has a chance to get hatch.

    You make assumptions and then judge everyone on those assumptions. I don't need a free 4k. But I want a way out of a match that is over. You don't like being slugged for 4 minutes. Now imagine that for >10 minutes. None of these are good but one is clearly worse than the other.

    The only reason I wouldn't take a surrender option is because it would incentivise the last 2 survivors to hide in the hopes the killer will surrender eventually.

    We are not even talking about a fair game anymore. Because not doing objectives for extended periods of time is considered against the rules by the devs. With good reason.

  • The_Krapper
    The_Krapper Member Posts: 3,259

    Your post is the whole thing wrong with solo q in general when you have people who refuse to do anything but hide the other survivors who are trying to play normal get screwed because all the weight is on them meanwhile you have 2 people running perks like left behind and hiding out all game, they need to completely remove the option to hide without doing objectives once you do it for like 80+secs of time and just give a constant aura reveal until they do a gen to get them out of there since they don't want to play the game

  • WolfyWood
    WolfyWood Member Posts: 475

    You're thinking too small. That's not a solution either.

    Imagine how crappy it'd be for the killer if swf's could just bring hatch offerings and go down away from the location or afk at the gate for a virtually guaranteed escape.

    At least now the killer can slug or at least travel to the spot during the sacrifice animation.

    I must reiterate, it's a complex problem that requires reworking how kills and escapes work towards winning or losing, that's why nothing has been implemented yet.

    It being reportable is a temporary fix to discourge it from happening every game, and I'd really like to see evidence of people getting consistently punished for it or a dev comment.

  • Coffeecrashing
    Coffeecrashing Member Posts: 3,794
    edited August 19

    Survivors would purposely place themselves in situations where the killer can’t hook them, so that hatch would spawn with two survivors left, and both would have a chance at escaping.

    And we know survivors would do this, because when we had the finisher mori PTB, I saw so many survivors purposely place themselves in situations where they can’t be hooked, because they had an extra inventive to do so.

  • Moonras2
    Moonras2 Member Posts: 381
    edited August 19

    How would they do that? If I'm not mistaken the hooks respawn now.

  • Prometheus1092
    Prometheus1092 Member Posts: 403

    I mean the screenshot shows the bot has done a gen as you were just slugged and still shows 2 gens left.... So that means there was 3 gens left to complete and 2 survivors left (one being a bot). I would consider that situation a win for the killer. I wouldn't consider wanting the 4k to get the BP bonus looking for a free kill it's skills they would have anyway had the match gone on as normal.

    People say killers are after a "free kill" even tho they clearly won the match by a landslide. I would say it's survivors looking for a "free escape" even tho they lost. A killer can't just do nothing for the whole match have a free kill at the end.

  • Coffeecrashing
    Coffeecrashing Member Posts: 3,794

    There are still places that aren’t in range of a hook. And survivors can easily cause this to happen by burning a badham offering with a basement at shack offering.

    And it doesn’t matter if hooks respawn, because if the only nearby hook is broken, then a slugged survivor that his flip flop can crawl somewhere that is outside of flip flop hook range, or a slugged survivor that has power struggle can crawl under a pallet. And by the time the hook respawns, the survivor has placed themselves in a situation where they can’t be hooked.

    There’s also the situations where the killer was forced to drop a survivor because if things like hook sabotages, and the survivor has so much wiggle meter filled, that if the survivor crawls away from the hooks, then the killer can’t hook them anymore.

  • Moonras2
    Moonras2 Member Posts: 381
    edited August 19

    I apologize I may just be understanding you wrong but I'm not seeing where any of this would change what I said above.

    Places that aren't within range of a hook are map problems and should be addressed. You are describing something that survivors can currently already do in a place it may be possible. I don't know how many of those even exist now but they are an issue that should be fixed.

    Flip flop wouldn't have any outcome on hatch spawning, unless you left them slugged for the timer duration.

    The survivors wouldn't be able to force the hatch to spawn. You would have to leave one on the ground too long. If they both run to the same corner of the map where they can't be hooked, which would be a rare spot that needs fixed, then one of them would have to be a recent fall. Meaning flip flop would have no effect. Sabo'ing a hook before running there would also have no change because you don't have to down them right away.

    You also still have the ability to close the hatch if an offering is used. So you would know where it most likely is and could actually force it to spawn by slugging someone, just to close it.

    Hook sabo to force a drop wouldn't have an effect on it either. That would mean no one was slugged for the hatch to even spawn. One would be on shoulder and one would be sabo'ing the hook. In that case you now know where both survivors are as well.

    That does throw in the complication of picking up and dropping a survivor resetting the timer though. I hadn't thought of that.

  • Neaxolotl
    Neaxolotl Member Posts: 1,477

    Ah it's so unfair, so we should remove hatches and instantly sacrifice survivors at those situations I guess

  • danielmaster87
    danielmaster87 Member Posts: 9,476

    And hatch doesn't solve this. Especially because "unwinnable" is very subjective in this game. Survivors can say that the game is unwinnable as soon as 1 person dies, and we'd just have to accept that definition since they're the majority. I don't think we should even be looking for a solution for this if it doesn't include giving agency to the killer. Survivors can't just hide, because that's what drags the game out. So I'm in favor of giving killer info to prevent halted games.

  • Prometheus1092
    Prometheus1092 Member Posts: 403

    Try flipping it, 4 survivors at the gate, game unwinnable for the killer. The killer gets a free kill to deny all 4 escaping even if the killer didn't get a single hook in the match. Survivors only get big BP score for all 4 escaping. Sound fair? I can guarantee swf especially would do what they can to deny the killer the single kill if the could and I bet many survivors would be annoyed at the fact a killer can suck that much at a match and still get a pitty kill at the end denying all 4 ever getting out. Survivors would say "but I did my objective, give me my escape"

  • danielmaster87
    danielmaster87 Member Posts: 9,476

    Because you're giving a false premise, that if the survivors are found they will guaranteed die. Seems like a skill issue to me. The alternative is that 1 survivor loops, and the other does the gens. If 1 gets hooked, their teammate waits for the right moment to save, and then the cycle starts again. If the killer guards the gen that was being worked on instead of chasing, then he has 2 survivors unaccounted for which is even worse for him. It isn't always the case that there's 2 survivors left, and 3-4 gens left to do, or no pallets left to use. If that's the case, those survivors deserve to lose anyway. But anything's possible for the survivors as long as they keep trying, not hiding but actually trying to advance the objective just like they would when all 4 are alive. Looking for a survivor-sided solution to the 2v1 scenario basically suggests that survivors should never be in a losing situation, even if it's very much their fault. Others seemingly can, but I can't go along with that nonsense.

  • NerfDHalready
    NerfDHalready Member Posts: 1,749

    oh so they should give the last survivor a free escape in a match killer clearly won. neat. entitlement much?

    have you guys never played a 2v1 in any other way than hiding? especially at less than 2 gens it's nowhere near impossible however much y'all like to pretend it is.

  • NerfDHalready
    NerfDHalready Member Posts: 1,749

    it's crazy to me they are unironically acting like killer wanting to get all their kills in a stomping match is too much to ask but not hiding for hatch for half an hour isn't. actually insane

  • danielmaster87
    danielmaster87 Member Posts: 9,476

    Your biggest mistake is buying into that horrible statistic of a 60-something % kill rate. Not only is it completely skewed by survivors throwing matches, and killers getting dominated all match and then having NOED at the end, but it could be the result of the killers having like 80% of their matches be draws. But hey, as long as it comes out to over 60%, killer must be too strong, right? Poppycock.

    Aura reveals for killer against survivors not doing anything is not a bad idea. You need to let the killer be able to close out the game. The survivors can already do so too, by doing the gens or getting hatch for free. What is a bad idea is giving the remaining survivors a gen boost. The whole reason killers tunnel is because they're on the back foot from the very start, because mathematically they can't withstand 4 survivors' gen efficiency. Even with really quick chases, the killer loses 2 gens instantly almost every time, starting the game at 3 gens and 1-2 hooks. So they want to get 1 survivor out ASAP, since they must. Giving the remaining survivors a boost negates that advantage. I don't think killers getting Haste in exchange would help either, because the devs will never give killer the Haste % that they need. It'll be like 2% or something unnoticeable.

  • Reinami
    Reinami Member Posts: 5,557

    The devs have clearly stated multiple times that survivors "hiding" and intentionally not completing their objective for a long period of time is, and i quote: "Not participating in normal gameplay" and is considered "holding the game hostage" just as body blocking a survivor in the corner can be. So don't blame OP, blame the devs.

  • Moonras2
    Moonras2 Member Posts: 381

    The thing is, those survivors have completed pretty much 100% of their objective, minus leaving through the gate.

    If you kill 2 people or even just tunnel out 1. The game is pretty much a guaranteed loss, unless it has been a fairly even match throughout. So for completing 1 half or 1 quarter of your objective, you have pretty much won the game. Do you feel you deserve the second half of your objective because you finished the first half?

    If so, let's say that survivors finish 3 gens with all 4 still alive. In this scenario, the killer still has options, even though the survivors have completed part of their objective. Those options aren't guaranteed to work, but they are there for the killer to try. Should those options be removed? Should the survivors deserve the second half of their objective for completing the first?

    Again, this is all assuming the matches are one sided. Balanced matches with back and forth can always go either way.

    The game can often feel hopeless enough for both sides. Without some sort of option to try for a hail mary win, there is no point in the match even continuing or the losing side to continue playing. May as well just throw in a forfeit option at that point. Of course everyone's opinion of fun is different. Some may enjoy the hopeless feeling.

    To clarify myself, I'm not for survivors holding the game hostage. It's boring, unfun, and a waste of time. It needs a change of some sort. But I get those same 3 feelings when a match feels completely hopeless and I have nothing to try.

  • WolfyWood
    WolfyWood Member Posts: 475

    There's too much nuance and variation in the game to argue over best-case or worst-case scenario, and my response was directly addressed to the op suggesting that killers should auto-win in a 2v1.

    Your last point is crazy considering my posts in this thread, if you're not interested in reading those I'm definitely not interested in repeating myself. Your call.